skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Four years ago I got a PR on a small side-project. It was a nice new feature, although it wasn’t exactly the scope of the project. At that time I thought it would be better to accept the PR since the contributor put some efforts into it, and it would have been rude (or so I thought) to say no.

Four years later, I’d say 50% of the burden on that project is due to the feature that PR introduced. I often think about that time, and during these four years I’ve learnt to say no to PRs, mostly after seeing more-experienced open-source leaders doing so.

The key aspect is maintainance: contributors come with a feature, they add it to your project, and then the maintenance burden is on you forever. Too much maintainance means you burn out, and the project is dead.

It’s important to keep that in mind when deciding to accept or refuse a PR. To avoid misunderstandings and angry people, you should be as neutral as possible: is it a good addition on the long terme? How much maintenance cost does it add? Will it make the project easier/harder to evolve?
I wonder if the class action will broaden against all the brokers who took this same action instead of just Robinhood (~~I read others mention Interactive Brokers, TD Ameritrade, Charles Schwabb, Trade212 (thank you 'Avalaxy), and others, but I have no sources to point to myself~~ 'johnbrodie said that TDA and other blocked buying on margin). In that scenario, the plaintiffs and defendants could definitely simply interpreted by normal people to be something like “People of the United States vs. Wall Street”. Both mainstream and alternative/niche media would have a field day over this story.

Is it really worth billions of dollars to further destroy the wavering belief that Americans still have about the American dream? How can you have any semblance of unity without evidence and/or faith that the powers that be in business and government will allow the ordinary person to have a realistic path towards tangible and meaningful prosperity?
Suggestion. If you support bringing services up on failure, you _could_ also do that during non emergency circumstances. Migrating between AZs or regions is something I would use.
The host, whoever he is, keeps bringing up risk to the retail trader, i.e. who's going to buy the shares. But if the stock is shorted 140%, the shorters HAVE to buy the shares to cover their positions so the risk is minimal.

That's my 5 year old understanding anyway.
Income is also correlated with deferred gratification and risk appetite.

Did these studies normalize for those confounding variables, because both are heritable.
No they don't. All trading platforms are bound by SEC and federal regulations.
The terms "broker" and"market maker" aren't slang words. There are strict requirements for platforms who do business under these financial titles.
Citadel allegedly reloaded Shorts on GME before Robinhood put restrictions
> In fact the only true way of solving the problem is to prevent people from publishing stuff.

No, actually. The solution would be instead to allow you personally to choose what you read/listen to, and to let other people do the same.

If you don't like certain content, you should certainly have the right to not see it. But other people should be able to see it if they choose to do so.
We still don't actually know what the Cybertruck will actually look like when it goes on sale. The concept design that they showed to the public wouldn't have been road legal pretty much anywhere. Some are also saying that the structure would also be too rigid to be legal in Europe.
Seems like a game to me.
With the caveat that as long as it doesn't require physical space.

With the cost of space in any major city, anything that requires a workshop, working space, or significant storage space is out of the window nowadays for anyone in a major city.

When I was a teenager my side hustle was buying, fixing, and selling used cars. My dad's was the same with small fishing boats.

The story of these billion dollar companies being started in their parent's garage sounds inspirational and all, but I'd imagine less so for the kids whose parents can't afford home with a garage.
Then set the loss at the price where the manipulation started and add a multiplier.
I would say plastic bans only reduces ocean plastics on the tiny margin if the country has a well developed waste management system, which most European countries has.

Coming from a country importing garbage to use as fuel in combined power and heating plants I see no major problem with some countries exporting garbage.

China imported plastics to recycle, not throw into their rivers. They stopped because the learned that the health cost exceeded the tiny profits that industry made.

With that said, banning some kinds of plastic use under certain circumstances is a good thing. For a sustainable solution we still need to figure out recycling, correctly used, plastic is an awesome material.
I agree with most of that. At the end of the day i do quality work in silence, and not in the open office. Losing the commute is a nice side effect though.
I was about to say that it sounds a lot like the same idea.

Seems like Hotwire leans a bit more towards "SPA" territory.
You need money to make money. No surprise here.
Robinhood may be between a rock and a hard place if the SCC finds that the discussions on Reddit constituted a conspiracy to manipulate the market, primarily using Robinhood, that Robinhood must have been aware of.

Robinhood probably is also trying to protect most of its users from being the last ones holding the hot potato. Robinhood has very little incentive to conspire with hedge funds, but every reason to protect their users form themselves, if they think many of their users are taking on risks that will likely hinder their ability and/or willingness to use Robinhood in the future.

This should not be construed as investment advice for or against GME at its current price.
> Please only open issues or PRs for small fixes. An extra if-statement, etc. Please don't add features or redesign anything or "fix my code" at a cosmetic or architecture level.

Another way of putting it might be to encourage them to describe the problem or other desired change rather than send code, and let you deal with it as you see fit.

For instance: instead of raising a PR to fix an open injection vector, raise an issue that says "when responding to X your code doesn't properly sanitise input Y meaning Z can happen".

> I know this sounds kinda whiny and entitled and anti-free-software

Not at all IMO. The word "free" covers many overlapping concepts, and your way of thinking about the freeness of your personal project is no less right than many others. You aren't stopping anyone doing what they want, you are just choosing to be selective about how you interact (which you are, or should be, free to do). Giving other people freedom to do things with your code does not mean you have to give up the freedom to do (or not do) what you want with it.

A long as you are up front and polite about it, there shouldn't be a problem. If anyone did have a problem with it, it is their problem not yours!

If I ever pull my finger out and make progress on my many possible personal projects to the point where there is something worth sharing, for the most part I'll probably take a very similar stance.
Robinhood have themselves to blame. They made it dead-easy to trade on margin and do irresponsible naked option plays all these years. And they benefited from that massively in terms of revenue from Citadel (order flow) and raising their own valuation. All of a sudden they care about investor risk?
You have it backwards, change cannot come from within. The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.
> I'm personally not a fan of the author's writing style.

Agreed. The paragraphs are too short and are not as freestanding as they should be. For instance the following should have been folded into the preceding paragraph, which provided the vital context:

> But that’s often the cause of the failure.

I also find it jarring to read a sentence beginning with and or but, although not everyone agrees with me that it's poor style.
No. Re-lending and naked shorting are nothing alike.

Actually my example kinda sucked. What's more likely to happen is that B borrows the stock from A, then sells it to C.

C then lends the share to D.

C doesn't know or care that the share was already borrowed once, and the only way to prevent re-lending it that way would be to make shares non-fungible, which would break more-or-less everything (then again maybe that's your goal).
Robinhood is a brokerage.

Brokerages can't manipulate markets.

It's illegal.
Risk tolerance and deferred gratification are heritable traits.
The article does point out this:

“And by far the most common reason piston engines quit is because they don’t receive fuel, either due to fuel starvation (the airplane has fuel but it doesn’t make it to the engine) or fuel exhaustion (the airplane truly ran out of it). These two causes account for over one-third of engine failure accidents”
This almost certainly wouldn't meet EU safety guidelines.
Many retail brokerages have disallowed buying GME, AMC, and a few others. Though, they are still letting users sell. Without the ability to buy, the price can only go down. There are other HN threads covering this aspect.
We don't condemn ties in all situations. They work in some (office) and not others (factories).

TFA quite specifically does not condemn yokes in all situations. They work in some (racing) and not others (everyday drivers).

Not sure which of gullible and/or moronic applies to you, but at least one does.
many geniuses are considered such because of active marketing of their efforts by prominent evangelists and sponsors, think Van Gogh and his brother.

Many have only been discovered after century in oblivion because someone found and promoted their work, think Bach and Mendelssohn, etc.
Of course not. They're probably just going to wait until this blows over and get back to business as usual.

The way it's panning out now they probably won't go down the regulatory route. They already have levers that they can pull if the behaviour happens again, through the platform (Robinhood and the like) limiting trading or having Reddit or Discord ban or suspend groups on spurious grounds such as hate speech.

Why go down the legal route when you can give a soft nudge to board members and still get the desired outcome?
EULAs can't override federal law.

That said, even if the SEC does rule against Citadel I wouldn't expect the fine to be anything that bothers Citadel. The message time and time again is that the fees are way less painful than not cheating in the first place.
The only problem I see here is that market makers can still buy the stock to prop it up so they don't have to pay out on the options they sold.

Restricting retail from buying the stock is a good idea. There is no legitimate reason to buy these stocks. They are doing naive investors a favor.

People who own the stock can either hold or sell. You sell if you think the current price exceeds the value.

I can guarantee that also no institutional investors are buying the stock. They just don't really need someone to tell them that.

Brokers are attempting to limit complaints by limiting their user's losses. They have done this in self interest.
WSB isn't a brokerage; it's an investment forum.

But sure, sue Reddit too if you want.

You'd still have the RH manipulation.
It's actually time travelling through the various UI states ur web application will go through.

It's really awesome for debugging complex ui interactions but not for actual line by line code debugging
That's be great. But unfortunately being decentralized and open will not stop the government regulating it. And the government will (unfairly, as shown by the current situation) regulate it if it gets big enough.
Is a TOS a contract once agreed to?
What if I, the consumer, don't really care about pragmatism? It's legal for me to purchase a motorcycle which has no seatbelts or crash protection whatsoever, but you want to make it illegal for me to buy a car with a novelty steering wheel? What's next – do we ban cars with too many horsepower because it's not 'pragmatic'?
> This is definitely illegal.

I think there must be laws that say the CEO and the board must get prison terms (preferably life, with no possibility of parole) for these crimes.

No, I will not listen to hogwash like "you shouldn't be responsible for the actions of people you hire". BS. They report to you. Even if they did it on their own, why didn't you reverse it? If you are not responsible for the actions of your employees or contractors, don't hire them. Close down. See if I care.
These bailouts are insane. And, if 2008 and 2000 weren't anomalies, _everyone_ gets bailed out! On both ends of the transaction. The little guy trying to "day trade" and the big guy taking big risky bets.
But they didn't restrict the trading of stock. They restricted the buying of stock. People were still able to sell. Blocking only one side of the transactions is blatant market manipulation.
Yeah, I realize just saying “it leaks memory” is useless to you in tracking down why. It could be due to any of a dozen different things that QB interacts with. And the next level of investigation is something that I don’t really have the skills, nor, probably, the time, to undertake.
Part of the thing is -- I dont have a margin account. I'm not leveraged. The whole bit about "protecting the retail investor" is absurd. There is nothing to protect and they face no harm from me since its not margined. I can lose all my equity and that is it. I am the one who faces harm -- because I cant actually get out of the trade of a lifetime.

Second thing -- I think there were many things going on and many cohorts on WSB.

- Cohort 1: possibly pump and dump (though, this happens all the time with hedge fund managers also trying to move their position...)...or perhaps 22yos excited by GameStop, not that hard to imagine. GME has been a huge discussion on WSB for months.

- Cohort 2: 22yos YOLO'ing their weekly stipend and stimulus check. No real though about pump and dump and more so just silly gambling.

- Cohort 3: Intelligent investors seeing an opportunity, not manipulating any more than a hedge fund manager does (see: Infinite Gamma Squeeze notice: https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/l3e54f/gme_infinite...)

- Cohort 4: Downtrodden retail "investors" looking to stick it to the man: https://twitter.com/inactivist_/status/1354537152445521923/p...

- Cohort 5: Onlookers on WSB (im a frequent reader, never post) looking to hitch a wagon to the runaway train.
Seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Many derivatives are just insurance.
I've got one of the Tesla Model 3 cars, which is afaik. the model which Tesla has gone farthest with the touch screen, and before I had that I drove a lot of different cars.

After driving Model 3 for a couple of years, I have to say that the touch screen is not a usability problem. The controls I need to have quick access to are not on the touch screen, and the ones that are on that screen, are controls I would have to take my eyes of the road and look for anyway.

I will have to grant that they have gone a bit overboard with putting controls in the touch interface, and I still don't get why the glove box opening button is in the touch UI, but that isn't a problem by any means.

I was a bit skeptical of the Model 3 UI, before I got it. But for me it is clearly a step up in usability from the "a million little buttons with weird symbols that who knows does what", and while that view of traditional car interfaces might be a bit unfair. So is all the "any touch screen UI in a car is bad", sentiment going around.
Touch interfaces can work well in a car, as long as you don't need to use it for the drive task, but only for auxiliary tasks that don't need, and shouldn't be split seconds tasks.
What was the purpose? I recall hearing / reading / watching about it and lots of fun theories but never anything concrete.
Open Source, but Closed to Contributions
Unless you are running the command via "sh -c", you can't see any shell builtin commands or Unix pipelines by dumping the process tree. For example, "cat > /dev/null", the redirection is done by the shell and isn't passed to cat's "char **argv", in the process tree you can only see a "cat" running without arguments (and a shell built-in is invisible). It also gives no information about the control flow of your one-liner shell script (e.g. what does the "for loop" do?), nor environmental variables, etc. You can try to reconstruct some information by inspecting its open files, its environ, etc., but it's not practical for any complicated combination of commands).
That is -not- what an activist investor is. An activist investor is someone that buys a large enough portion of a company in order to have a say in board operations, etc (even liquidation.) You can go on air and talk up your company, ever CEO, etc does that. That is expected. What he did was talk down positions he was going into. That is not activism.
It's not just Robinhood, I'm on Schwab and they blocked trading GME this morning (didn't try it but SELL might still be open)
>At this point retail money is flooding into this stock left and right, and people are starting invest money they cannot afford to lose.

Yes, lets do them a favor by destroying the value of their life savings they just invested.

>The problem for these brokers is when this musical chairs dance stops, retail investors will be holding the bag. Full stop.

Are you new? That's the entire reason wallstreetbets exists in the first place. It was always about losing money on purpose.
Of course, I'm not complaining.

Just stating plainly I welcome the opportunity to do it full-time.
It is obvious from your comment you are the laymen, it is very tiring hearing accusations of criminality from you when you get lost in the basics. You seem to be the kind of folks that the headlines 'Nazis and white supremasists are buying gamestop' are designed for.

Stock can be bough for reasons that have nothing to do with it's market value.

I can buy a stock because i want to own it, maybe i want the voting rights, maybe i want to have standing so that i can file a lawsuit for securities fraud. Maybe i am planning hostile takeover. Maybe I want to proudly hang it at my door.
Caveat: I don't know anything about short selling, so I may be misinterpreting this.

That said, https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-ba... notes you only get listed as a threshold security if a few criteria are met, one of which is that the amount failed to deliver must be:

> equal to at least 0.5% of the issuer's total shares outstanding

Based on 70M outstanding shares, that means at least 350,000 undelivered shares. We don't know _why_ there was a failure to deliver, though. Not all failures may be related to short selling - someone's system screwing up for mundane reasons could cause such a thing, with no malice required.
"This is Wall-street Dr. Burry, if you offer us free money, we're going to take it"

The notion that an exchange would protect a trader from trades is laughably absurd.
That is a real stretch. Plenty of people have lost fortunes on /r/wsb using robinhood without anything of note happening.
It was discussed in the book Outliers. Here's another link I found discussing it.

https://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Early-Days-as-a-...
WSB is a forum, not a person or company.
Nah. FINRA and the SEC eat this kind of argument for lunch. It's Robinhood's platform, but they have to follow the law just like anyone else.

"Fair, orderly, and efficient markets" doesn't mean that you take away someone's seat at the table just because he's winning. If it were Pershing Square driving the long side instead of r/WallStreetBets, there's no chance in hell that Goldman (Ackman's PB if I'm not mistaken) would block opening trades.
Right, we can do without a lot of nice features. For example, I could do without a modern editor, maybe get by with gedit or something similar. But I don't... the value I get from them is much greater than the money spent.

My laptop display upgrade was maybe $200 five years ago. It has payed that back in clarity (and the amount of code I can see at once) every single day since.
first, I am a tesla fan, but I was thinking this isn't good.

then thinking a bit longer, I thought this WILL kill people.

(for completely different reasons that the article writer)

The first danger is that steering wheels are used as a grab handle.

A steering wheel is used to control the direction of the car.

But it is ALSO used unofficially the driver to support himself, sort of a "grab handle". You can say this is a misuse of a steering wheel, but people still do it. (did you know you should grip a motorcycle with your knees and use the handlebars for steernig only? most people don't do that either)

The problem here is that depending on where you grab the wheel, it may change the direction of the car. This can sort of happen with a normal wheel, but it is not as pronounced. With the yoke your hand will probably put torque on the wheel.

The second reason is bumping.

If you bump a normal steering wheel, it doesn't change the direction of the car.

With the yoke, for example banging on the top of the wheel except in the exact center will probably change the direction of the car. This also applies underneath, say if you bump it with your leg or body.

(I can imagine this going terribly wrong with a car full of kids in a model X)

The third reason is the stalks and position.

Control stalks are convenient and you can find them with your fingertip. They are in a fixed position, no matter what way you are steering.

steering wheel mounted controls do not benefit from the same fixed positioning.

Have you ever tried adjusting the volume on a steering wheel control? Now do it when the wheel is tilted. same idea.

the fourth reason is stalks and separation.

Control stalks are also "shrouded/protected" by the wheel. They are behind the wheel and protected from most accidental input. If you've accidentally beeped your horn, that's sort of the idea. It's harder to accidentally turn on your turn signal by accident (even though it can happen). It seems like the turn signals on the front of the wheel next to the control wheel might suffer from that.

And just personal preference not related to safety:

I liked the model S control wheels - they seemed to be pretty good ergonomically.

I hated the model 3 control wheels - they felt like a $5 mouse and did not have the right feel.

honestly, I think the wheel should be an option.

and I am glad the dashboard still exists.
Echo Chambers in Investment Discussion Boards (2017)
True, there needs to be an SEC investigation and jail time.
Why are you contrasting those two things? Don't they BOTH get sued AND lose retail trade volume by restricting these tickets?
This is a bad take. There's millions of bad trades you can make. Should Robinhood block all of those as well?
I don't know, HN isn't much more than a focused subreddit (no offense meant!).

I could imagine some kind of federated Reddit where HN could be a community fully managed by dang et al. according to their own needs/wants.

Then you just subscribe to each community as you like. Much like you can unsubscribe to all the default subreddits and only subscribe to the subreddits that interest you, only this time you don't have Reddit 's commercial interests/standards hanging over your head with the power to shut you down.

Granted I'm not sure of the value (other than censorship resistance) vs. a set of fragmented, specialized forums we had way back when.
Code for Psychopaths, Report Issues for Friends – Developer Soft Skills
AIUI Robinhood has halted buying shares and options, but they haven't halted selling.

If it was purely a halt on all trading I could see the logic, but only preventing people from buying seems fishy to me.

(I'm not involved one way or the other; I don't trade shares at all)
Tim Cook Implies Facebook's Business Model Leads to Polarization and Violence